CONCORDANCE:String = Moulton

rwp@Info @ There is no doubt of the need of a new series of volumes today in the light of the new knowledge. Many ministers have urged me to undertake such a task and finally I have agreed to do it at the solicitation of my publishers. The readers of these volumes (six are planned)...technical books required, like Moulton and ..._Vocabulary of the New Testament_. The critical student will appreciate the more delicate distinctions in words. But it is a sad fact that many ministers, laymen, and women, who took courses in Greek at college, university, or seminary, have allowed the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches to choke off the Greek that they once knew. Some, strangely enough, have done it even in the supposed interest of the very gospel whose vivid messages they have thus allowed to grow dim and faint. If some of these vast numbers can have their interest in the Greek New Testament revived, these volumes will be worth while. Some may be incited, as many have been by my volume, _The Minister and His Greek New Testament_, to begin the study of the Greek New Testament under the guidance of a book like Davis's _Beginner's Grammar of the Greek New Testament_. Others who are without a turn for Greek or without any opportunity to start the study will be able to follow the drift of the remarks and be able to use it all to profit in sermons, in Sunday school lessons, or for private edification.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale“\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg“\ refers more to the substance. But \lale“\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthr“pinˆs sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask“\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in kjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from kjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin“\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; 41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in kjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:14 @{Now the natural man} (\psuchikos de anthr“pos\). Note absence of article here, "A natural man" (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as \pneuma\ and \pneumatikos, psuchˆ\ and \psuchikos, sarx\ and \sarkinos\ and \sarkikos\. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his _New Testament Word Studies_, pp. 62-68, and in his {Spirit, Soul, and Flesh}. The papyri furnish so many examples of \sarx, pneuma\, and \psuchˆ\ that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. \Psuchikos\ is a qualitative adjective from \psuchˆ\ (breath of life like \anima\, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by _animalis_ and the German by _sinnlich_, the original sense of animal life as in kjv@Jude:1:19; kjv@James:3:15|. In kjv@1Corinthians:15:44,46| there is the same contrast between \psuchikos\ and \pneumatikos\ as here. The \psuchikos\ man is the unregenerate man while the \pneumatikos\ man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God. {Receiveth not} (\ou dechetai\). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In kjv@Romans:8:7| Paul definitely states the inability (\oude gar dunatai\) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer "foolishness" (\m“ria\) to us as was once the case (1:23|). Today one notes certain of the _intelligentsia_ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. {He cannot know them} (\ou dunatai gn“nai\). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ. {They are spiritually judged} (\pneumatik“s anakrinetai\). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In kjv@Acts:17:11| the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These \psuchikoi\ men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the \psuchˆ\ (mere animal nature) rather than by the \pneuma\ (the renewed spirit).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:7 @{What soldier ever serveth?} (\tis strateuetai pote;\). "Who ever serves as a soldier?" serves in an army (\stratos\). Present middle of old verb \strateu“\. {At his own charges} (\idiois ops“niois\). This late word \ops“nion\ (from \opson\, cooked meat or relish with bread, and \“neomai\, to buy) found in Menander, Polybius, and very common in papyri and inscriptions in the sense of rations or food, then for the soldiers' wages (often provisions) or the pay of any workman. Songs:of the wages of sin (Romans:6:23|). Paul uses \lab“n ops“nion\ (receiving wages, the regular idiom) in kjv@2Corinthians:11:8|. See Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_; Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 148,266; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 168. To give proof of his right to receive pay for preaching Paul uses the illustrations of the soldier (verse 7|), the husbandman (verse 7|), the shepherd (verse 7|), the ox treading out the grain (8|), the ploughman (verse 10|), the priests in the temple (13|), proof enough in all conscience, and yet not enough for some churches who even today starve their pastors in the name of piety. {Who planteth a vineyard?} (\tis phuteuei ampel“na;\). \Ampel“n\ no earlier than Diodorus, but in LXX and in papyri. Place of vines (\ampelos\), meaning of ending \-“n\. {Who feedeth a flock?} (\tis poimainei poimnˆn;\). Cognate accusative, both old words. Paul likens the pastor to a soldier, vinedresser, shepherd. He contends with the world, he plants churches, he exercises a shepherd's care over them (Vincent).

rwp@1Peter:2:23 @{When he was reviled} (\loidoroumenos\). Present passive participle of \loidore“\, old verb (from \loidoros\, reviler, kjv@1Corinthians:5:11|) as in kjv@John:9:28|. {Reviled not again} (\ouk anteloidorei\). Imperfect active (for repeated incidents) of \antiloidore“\, late and rare compound (...simplex verb as here, Moulton and ..._Vocabulary_), here only in N.T. Idiomatic use of \anti\ (in turn, return, back). {Threatened not} (\ouk ˆpeilei\). Imperfect again (repeated acts) of \apeile“\, old compound (from \apeilˆ\, threat, kjv@Acts:9:1|), in N.T. only here and kjv@Acts:4:17|. {But committed himself} (\paredidou de\). Imperfect active again (kept on committing himself) of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, usually of one to a judge, but here not of another (as the Sanhedrin), but himself (supply \heauton\), for Jesus uses this very idea in kjv@Luke:23:46| as he dies. Jesus thus handed himself and his cause over to the Father who judges righteously (\t“i krinonti dikai“s\, dative of present active articular participle of \krin“\).

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:8 @{Even so, being affectionately desirous of you} (\hout“s omeiromenoi hum“n\). Clearly the correct text rather than \himeiromenoi\ from \himeir“\, old verb to long for. But the verb \homeiromai\ (Westcott and Hort _om_., smooth breathing) occurs nowhere else except MSS. in kjv@Job:3:21; kjv@Psalms:62:2| (Symmachus) and the Lycaonian sepulchral inscription (4th cent. A.D.) about the sorrowing parents \homeiromenoi peri paidos\, {greatly desiring their son} (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Moulton suggests that it comes from a root \smer\, remember, and that \o-\ is a derelict preposition \o\ like \o-duromai, o-kell“, “-keanos\. Wohlenberg (Zahn, _Kommentar_) calls the word "a term of endearment," "derived from the language of the nursery" (Milligan). {We were well pleased} (\ˆudokoumen\). Imperfect active of \eudoke“\, common verb in later Greek and in N.T. (see on kjv@Matthew:3:17|), picturing Paul's idea of their attitude while in Thessalonica. Paul often has it with the infinitive as here. {To impart} (\metadounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \metadid“mi\, old verb to share with (see on kjv@Luke:3:11|). Possible zeugma with {souls} (\psuchas\), though Lightfoot renders "lives." Paul and his associates held nothing back. {Because ye were become very dear to us} (\dioti agapˆtoi hˆmin egenˆthˆte\). Note \dioti\ (double cause, \dia, hoti\, for that), use of \ginomai\ again for become, and dative \hˆmin\ with verbal \agapˆtoi\, beloved and so dear. A beautiful picture of the growth of Paul's affection for them as should be true with every pastor.

rwp@1Timothy:2:12 @{I permit not} (\ouk epitrep“\). Old word \epitrep“\, to permit, to allow (1Corinthians:16:7|). Paul speaks authoritatively. {To teach} (\didaskein\). In the public meeting clearly. And yet all modern Christians allow women to teach Sunday school classes. One feels somehow that something is not expressed here to make it all clear. {Nor to have dominion over a man} (\oude authentein andros\). The word \authente“\ is now cleared up by Kretschmer (_Glotta_, 1912, pp. 289ff.) and by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_. See also Nageli, _Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus_ and Deissmann, _Light, etc._, pp. 88f. \Autodike“\ was the literary word for playing the master while \authente“\ was the vernacular term. It comes from \aut-hentes\, a self-doer, a master, autocrat. It occurs in the papyri (substantive \authentˆs\, master, verb \authente“\, to domineer, adjective \authentikos\, authoritative, "authentic"). Modern Greek has \aphentes\ = Effendi = "Mr."

rwp@2Corinthians:1:9 @{Yea} (\alla\). Confirmatory use as in 7:11|, rather than adversative. {The answer of death} (\to apokrima tou thanatou\) This late word from \apokrinomai\, to reply, occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is in Josephus, Polybius, inscriptions and papyri (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 257; Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), and always in the sense of decision or judgment rendered. But Vulgate renders it by _responsum_ and that idea suits best here, unless Paul conceives God as rendering the decision of death. {We ourselves have had within ourselves} (\autoi en heautois eschˆkamen\). Regular perfect of \ech“\, to have. And still have the vivid recollection of that experience. For this lively dramatic use of the present perfect indicative for a past experience see also \eschˆka\ in 2:13| (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 143f.; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 896f.). {That we should not trust in ourselves} (\hina mˆ pepoithotes “men eph' heautois\). A further purpose of God in affliction beyond that in verse 4|. "This dreadful trial was sent to him in order to give him a precious spiritual lesson (12:7-10|)" (Robertson and Plummer). Note periphrastic perfect active subjunctive of \peith“\, to persuade. {In} (\epi\), upon, both ourselves and God.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:22 @{Sealed us} (\sphragisamenos hˆmas\). From \sphragiz“\ old verb, common in LXX and papyri for setting a seal to prevent opening (Daniel:6:17|), in place of signature (1Kings:21:18|). Papyri examples show a wide legal use to give validity to documents, to guarantee genuineness of articles as sealing sacks and chests, etc. (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 238; Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {The earnest of the Spirit} (\ton arrab“na tou pneumatos\). A word of Semitic origin (possibly Phoenician) and spelled both \arab“n\ and \arrab“n\. It is common in the papyri as earnest money in a purchase for a cow or for a wife (a dowry). In N.T. only here; 5:5; kjv@Ephesians:1:14|. It is part payment on the total obligation and we use the very expression today, "earnest money." It is God, says Paul, who has done all this for us and God is Paul's pledge that he is sincere. He will come to Corinth in due time. This earnest of the Spirit in our hearts is the witness of the Spirit that we are God's.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:9 @{We make it our aim} (\philotimoumetha\). Old and common verb, present middle, from \philotimos\ (\philos, timˆ\, fond of honour), to act from love of honour, to be ambitious in the good sense (1Thessalonians:4:11; kjv@2Corinthians:5:9; kjv@Romans:15:20|). The Latin _ambitio_ has a bad sense from _ambire_, to go both ways to gain one's point. {To be well-pleasing to him} (\euarestoi aut“i einai\). Late adjective that shows Paul's loyalty to Christ, his Captain. Found in several inscriptions in the _Koin‚_ period (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 214; Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).

rwp@2Corinthians:9:15 @{Thanks be to God} (\charis t“i the“i\). Third time (verses 11,12,15|). {For his unspeakable gift} (\epi tˆi anekdiˆgˆt“i autou d“reƒi\). One of Paul's gems flashed out after the somewhat tangled sentence (verses 10-14|) like a gleam of light that clears the air. Words fail Paul to describe the gift of Christ to and for us. He may have coined this word as it is not found elsewhere except in ecclesiastical writers save as a variant (B L) for \adiˆgˆton\ in Aristeas 99 (\thaumasmon anekdiˆgˆton\, "wonder beyond description," Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). See similar word in kjv@Romans:11:33| (\anexichniasta\, unsearchable) and kjv@Ephesians:3:8|.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ BOOKS ON II PETER BESIDES THOSE ON I PETER ALSO Abbott, E. A., _The Expositor_ (Jan. to March, 1822). Chase, F. H., _Hastings D B_ (Second Peter). Deuteronomy:Zwaan, _2 Peter en Judas_ (1909). Dietlein, W. O., _Der 2 Brief Petri_ (1851). Grosch, H., _Die Echtheit des zweiten Briefes Petri_ (1889). Henkel, K., _Der zweite Brief des Apostelfursten Petrus_ (1904). Hofmann, J. C., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda (1875) Hundhausen, _Das zweite Pontifkalschreiben des Apostels Petrus_ (1873). James, M. R., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Cambridge Greek Testament, 1912). Lumby, J. R., _2 Peter and Jude_ (in Bible Commentary). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. Jude:and the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1907). Plummer, A., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Vol. 3, N.T. Commentary for English Readers by Ellicott). Robson, E. I., _Studies in the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1915). Schott, Th., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda_ (1863). Schott, _Der 2 Br. Petri und der Br. Juda Erkl_. (1863). Schweenhorst, H., _Das Verhaltnis des Judasbriefes zum zweiten Petrusbriefe_ (1904). Snyman, D. R., _The Authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter_ (thesis in 1923 for Th.D. degree at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary). Spitta, F, _Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1885). Strachan, R. D., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910), Ullman, C., _Der 2 Brief Petri Krit. untersuch._ (1821). Warfield, B. B., _A Defence of 2 Peter_ (Southern Presbyterian Review, January, 1882). ,_Dr. Edwin A. Abbott on the Genuineness of Second Peter (Southern Presbyterian Review_, 1883). Werdermann, _H., Die Irrlehrer des Judasbriefes und 2 Petrusbriefes_ (1913). Wiesinger, J. T. A., _Der zweite Brief des Apostels Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1862). kjv@2Peter:1:1 @{Simon Peter} (\Sim“n Petros\). Aleph A K L P have \Syme“n\ as in kjv@Acts:15:14|, while B has \Sim“n\. The two forms occur indifferently in I Macc. 2:3, 65 for the same man. {Servant and apostle} (\doulos kai apostolos\). Like kjv@Romans:1:1; kjv@Titus:1:1|. {To them that have obtained} (\tois lachousin\). Dative plural articular participle second aorist active of \lagchan“\, old verb, to obtain by lot (Luke:1:9|), here with the accusative (\pistin\) as in kjv@Acts:1:17|. {Like precious} (\isotimon\). Late compound adjective (\isos\, equal, \timˆ\, honor, price), here only in N.T. But this adjective (Field) is used in two ways, according to the two ideas in \timˆ\ (value, honor), either like in value or like in honor. This second idea is the usual one with \isotimos\ (inscriptions and papyri, Josephus, Lucian), while \polutimos\ has the notion of price like \timˆ\ in 1:7,19; 2:4,6f|. The faith which they have obtained is like in honor and privilege with that of Peter or any of the apostles. {With us} (\hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case after \isotimon\. Equal to \tˆi hˆm“n\ (the faith of us). {In the righteousness} (\en dikaiosunˆi\). Definite because of the preposition \en\ and the following genitive even though anarthrous. The O.T. sense of \dikaiosunˆ\ applied to God (Romans:1:17|) and here to Christ. {Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). Songs:the one article (\tou\) with \theou\ and \s“tˆros\ requires precisely as with \tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\ (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in 1:11| as in 2:20; 3:2,18|. Songs:in kjv@1Peter:1:3| we have \ho theos kai patˆr\ (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, _Grammatik_, p. 158)...one person be meant." Moulton... (_Prol._, p. 84) cites papyri examples of like usage of \theos\ for the Roman emperors. See the same idiom in kjv@Titus:2:13|. The use of \theos\ by Peter as a predicate with Jesus Christ no more disproves the Petrine authorship of this Epistle than a like use in kjv@John:1:1| disproves the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the same use in kjv@Titus:2:13| disproves the genuineness of Titus. Peter had heard Thomas call Jesus God (John:20:28|) and he himself had called him the Son of God (Matthew:16:16|).

rwp@2Timothy:2:25 @{Correcting} (\paideuonta\). See kjv@Titus:2:12|. "Schooling" (Parry). {Oppose themselves} (\antidiatithemenous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \antidiatithˆmi\, late double compound (Diodorus, Philo) to place oneself in opposition, here only in N.T. {If peradventure God may give} (\mˆ pote d“iˆ ho theos\). Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of \did“mi\ for the usual \doiˆ\ as they do in 1:18|. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with \mˆ pote\ in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense \dei\ (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive \ananˆps“sin\, while in kjv@Luke:3:15| \mˆ pote eie\ is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 989)...go as far as Moulton does ...\d“ˆi\ here (_Prolegomena_, pp. 55, 193). {Repentance} (\metanoian\). "Change of mind" (2Corinthians:7:10; kjv@Romans:2:4|). {Unto the knowledge of the truth} (\eis epign“sin alˆtheias\). Paul's word "full knowledge" (Co 1:9|).

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE STYLE It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: "It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 70f.). But Blass (_Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa_, 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of "a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many "parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of "the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary _Koin‚_...than to the vernacular. Moulton... (_Cambridge Biblical Essays_, p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

rwp@James:1:13 @{Let no one say} (\mˆdeis leget“\). Present active imperative, prohibiting such a habit. {When he is tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle of \peiraz“\, here in evil sense of tempt, not test, as in kjv@Matthew:4:1|. Verses 12-18| give a vivid picture of temptation. {I am tempted of God} (\apo theou peirazomai\). The use of \apo\ shows origin (\apo\ with ablative case), not agency (\hupo\), as in kjv@Mark:1:13|, of Satan. It is contemptible, but I have heard wicked and weak men blame God for their sins. Cf. kjv@Proverbs:19:3|; Sirach 15:11f. Temptation does not spring "from God." {Cannot be tempted with evil} (\apeirastos kak“n\). Verbal compound adjective (alpha privative and \peiraz“\), probably with the ablative case, as is common with alpha privative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516), though Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 74) treats it as the genitive of definition. The ancient Greek has \apeiratos\ (from \peira“\), but this is the earliest example of \apeirastos\ (from \peiraz“\) made on the same model. Only here in the N.T. Hort notes \apeiratos kak“n\ as a proverb (Diodorus, Plutarch, Josephus) "free from evils." That is possible here, but the context calls for "untemptable" rather than "untempted." {And he himself tempteth no man} (\peirazei de autos oudena\). Because "untemptable."

rwp@James:4:2 @{Ye lust} (\epithumeite\). Present active indicative of \epithume“\, old word (from \epi, thumos\, yearning passion for), not necessarily evil as clearly not in kjv@Luke:22:15| of Christ, but usually so in the N.T., as here. Coveting what a man or nation does not have is the cause of war according to James. {Ye kill and covet} (\phoneuete kai zˆloute\). Present active indicatives of \phoneu“\ (old verb from \phoneus\, murderer) and \zˆlo“\, to desire hotly to possess (1Corinthians:12:31|). It is possible (perhaps probable) that a full stop should come after \phoneuete\ (ye kill) as the result of lusting and not having. Then we have the second situation: "Ye covet and cannot obtain (\epituchein\, second aorist active infinitive of \epitugchan“\), and (as a result) ye fight and war." This punctuation makes better sense than any other and is in harmony with verse 1|. Thus also the anticlimax in \phoneuete\ and \zˆloute\ is avoided. Mayor makes the words a hendiadys, "ye murderously envy." {Ye have not, because ye ask not} (\ouk echete dia to mˆ aiteisthai humas\). James refers again to \ouk echete\ (ye do not have) in verse 2|. Such sinful lusting will not obtain. "Make the service of God your supreme end, and then your desires will be such as God can fulfil in answer to your prayer" (Ropes). Cf. kjv@Matthew:6:31-33|. The reason here is expressed by \dia\ and the accusative of the articular present middle infinitive of \aite“\, used here of prayer to God as in kjv@Matthew:7:7f|. \Humƒs\ (you) is the accusative of general reference. Note the middle voice here as in \aiteisthe\ in 3|...spirit of prayer, but Moulton... (_Prol_., p. 160) regards the distinction between \aite“\ and \aiteomai\ often "an extinct subtlety."

rwp@Info_John @ BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE APOCALYPSE It should be said at once that the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel does not depend on that of the Apocalypse. In fact, some men hold to the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse who deny that of the Gospel while some hold directly the opposite view. Some deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse, while the majority hold to the Johannine authorship of Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse as was the general rule till after the time of Origen. The author of the Apocalypse claims to be John (Revelation:1:4,9; 22:8|)...language. Even J. H. Moulton... (_Prolegomena_, p. 9, note 4) says bluntly: "If its date was 95 A.D., the author cannot have written the fourth Gospel only a short time after." Or before, he would say. But the date of the Apocalypse seems definitely to belong to the reign of Domitian. Songs:one ventures to call attention to the statement in kjv@Acts:4:13| where Peter and John are described as \agrammatoi kai idi“tai\ (unlettered and private or unschooled men). It is curious also that it is precisely in 2Peter and the Apocalypse that we have so many grammatical solecisms and peculiarities. We know that the Fourth Gospel was reviewed by a group of John's friends in Ephesus, while he was apparently alone in the Isle of Patmos. The excitement of the visions would naturally increase the uncouth vernacular of the Apocalypse so much like that in the Greek papyri as seen in Milligan's _Greek Papyri_...able, in spite of Moulton's dictum, ...

rwp@John:12:9 @{The common people} (\ho ochlos polus\). This is the right reading with the article \ho\, literally, "the people much or in large numbers." One is reminded of the French idiom. Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 284) gives a few rare examples of the idiom \ho anˆr agathos\. Westcott suggests that \ochlos polus\ came to be regarded as a compound noun. This is the usual order in the N.T. rather than \polus ochlos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 774). Mark (Mark:12:37|) has \ho polus ochlos\. Moulton (_Proleg_., p. 84) terms \ho ochlos polus\ here and in verse 12| "a curious misplacement of the article." John's use of \ochlos\ is usually the common crowd as "riff-raff." {That he was} (\hoti estin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense (\egn“\, second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\). These "Jews" are not all hostile to Jesus as in 5:10; 6:41|, etc., but included some who were friendly (verse 11|). {But that they might see Lazarus also} (\all' hina kai ton Lazaron id“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \hora“\. Motive enough to gather a great crowd, to see one raised from the dead (cf. verse 1| for the same phrase, "whom he had raised from the dead"). Some of the very witnesses of the raising of Lazarus will bear witness later (verse 17|). It was a tense situation.

rwp@Luke:12:8 @{Everyone who shall confess me} (\pas hos an homologˆsei en emoi\). Just like kjv@Matthew:10:32| except the use of \an\ here which adds nothing. The Hebraistic use of \en\ after \homologe“\...is admitted by even Moulton... (_Prolegomena_, p. 104). {The Son of man} (\ho huios tou anthr“pou\). Here kjv@Matthew:10:32| has \k'ag“\ (I also) as the equivalent.

rwp@Mark:2:4 @{Come nigh} (\proseggisai\). But Westcott and Hort read \prosenegkai\, to bring to, after Aleph, B, L, 33, 63 (cf. kjv@John:5:18|). {They uncovered the roof} (\apestegasan tˆn stegˆn\). They unroofed the roof (note paronomasia in the Greek and cognate accusative)...papyrus example given in Moulton and ..._Vocabulary_. They climbed up a stairway on the outside or ladder to the flat tile roof and dug out or broke up (\exoruxantes\) the tiles (the roof). There were thus tiles (\dia t“n keram“n\, kjv@Luke:5:19|) of laths and plaster and even slabs of stone stuck in for strength that had to be dug out. It is not clear where Jesus was (\hopou ˆn\), either downstairs, (Holtzmann) or upstairs (Lightfoot), or in the quadrangle (_atrium_ or _compluvium_, if the house had one). "A composition of mortar, tar, ashes and sand is spread upon the roofs, and rolled hard, and grass grows in the crevices. On the houses of the poor in the country the grass grows more freely, and goats may be seen on the roofs cropping it" (Vincent). {They let down the bed} (\chal“si ton krabatton\), historical present again, aorist tense in kjv@Luke:5:19| (\kathˆkan\). The verb means to lower from a higher place as from a boat. Probably the four men had a rope fastened to each corner of the pallet or poor man's bed (\krabatton\, Latin _grabatus_. Songs:one of Mark's Latin words). Matthew (Matthew:9:2|) has \klinˆ\, general term for bed. Luke has \klinidion\ (little bed or couch). Mark's word is common in the papyri and is spelled also \krabbatos\, sometimes \krabatos\, while W, Codex Washingtonius, has it \krabbaton\.

rwp@Mark:14:33 @{Greatly amazed and sore troubled} (\ekthambeisthai kai adˆmonein\). kjv@Matthew:26:37| has "sorrowful and sore troubled." See on Matt. about \adˆmonein\. Mark alone uses \exthambeisthai\ (here and in 9:15|)...papyrus example given by Moulton and ..._Vocabulary_. The verb \thambe“\ occurs in kjv@Mark:10:32| for the amazement of the disciples at the look of Jesus as he went toward Jerusalem. Now Jesus himself feels amazement as he directly faces the struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane. He wins the victory over himself in Gethsemane and then he can endure the loss, despising the shame. For the moment he is rather amazed and homesick for heaven. "Long as He had foreseen the Passion, when it came clearly into view its terror exceeded His anticipations" (Swete). "He learned from what he suffered," (Hebrews:5:8|) and this new experience enriched the human soul of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:14:41 @{It is enough} (\apechei\). Alone in Mark. This impersonal use is rare and has puzzled expositors no little. The papyri (Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_ and Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) furnish many examples of it as a receipt for payment in full. See also kjv@Matthew:6:2ff.; kjv@Luke:6:24; kjv@Phillipians:4:18| for the notion of paying in full. It is used here by Jesus in an ironical sense, probably meaning that there was no need of further reproof of the disciples for their failure to watch with him. "This is no time for a lengthened exposure of the faults of friends; the enemy is at the gate" (Swete). See further on ¯Matthew:26:45| for the approach of Judas.

rwp@Mark:14:72 @{Called to mind} (\anemnˆsthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative. kjv@Matthew:26:75| has the uncompounded verb \emnˆsthˆ\ while kjv@Luke:22:61| has another compound \hupemnˆsthˆ\, was reminded. {When he thought thereon} (\epibal“n\). Second aorist active participle of \epiball“\. It is used absolutely here, though there is a reference to \to rhˆma\ above, the word of Jesus, and the idiom involves \ton noun\ so that the meaning is to put the mind upon something. In kjv@Luke:15:12|...with a different sense. Moulton... (_Prolegomena_, p. 131) quotes a Ptolemaic papyrus Tb P 50 where \epibal“n\ probably means "set to," put his mind on. {Wept} (\eklaien\). Inchoative imperfect, began to weep. kjv@Matthew:26:75| has the ingressive aorist \eklausen\, burst into tears.

rwp@Matthew:2:2 @{For we saw his star in the east} (\eidomen gar autou ton astera en tˆi anatolˆi\). This does not mean that they saw the star which was in the east. That would make them go east to follow it instead of west from the east. The words "in the east" are probably to be taken with "we saw" i.e. we were in the east when we saw it, or still more probably "we saw his star at its rising" or "when it rose" as Moffatt puts it. The singular form here (\tˆi anatolˆi\) does sometimes mean "east" (Revelation:21:13|), though the plural is more common as in kjv@Matthew:2:1|. In kjv@Luke:1:78| the singular means dawn as the verb (\aneteilen\) does in kjv@Matthew:4:16| (Septuagint)...of expectancy for something. Moulton... (_Journal of Theological Studies_, 1902, p. 524) "refers to the Magian belief that a star could be the _fravashi_, the counterpart or angel (cf. kjv@Matthew:18:10|) of a great man" (McNeile). They came to worship the newly born king of the Jews. Seneca (_Epistle_ 58) tells of Magians who came to Athens with sacrifices to Plato after his death. They had their own way of concluding that the star which they had seen pointed to the birth of this Messianic king. Cicero (_Deuteronomy:Divin_. i. 47) "refers to the constellation from which, on the birthnight of Alexander, Magians foretold that the destroyer of Asia was born" (McNeile). Alford is positive that no miracle is intended by the report of the Magi or by Matthew in his narrative. But one must be allowed to say that the birth of Jesus, if really God's only Son who has become Incarnate, is the greatest of all miracles. Even the methods of astrologers need not disturb those who are sure of this fact.

rwp@Matthew:5:31 @{A writing of divorcement} (\apostasion\), "a divorce certificate" (Moffatt), "a written notice of divorce" (Weymouth). The Greek is an abbreviation of \biblion apostasiou\ (Ma 19:7; kjv@Mark:10:4|). Vulgate has here _libellum repudii_. The papyri use \suggraphˆ apostasiou\ in commercial transactions as "a bond of release" (see Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_, etc.) The written notice (\biblion\) was a protection to the wife against an angry whim of the husband who might send her away with no paper to show for it.

rwp@Matthew:6:11 @{Our daily bread} (\ton arton hˆm“n ton epiousion\). This adjective "daily" (\epiousion\) coming after "Give us this day" (\dos hˆmŒn sˆmeron\) has given expositors a great deal of trouble. The effort has been made to derive it from \epi\ and \“n\ (\ousa\). It clearly comes from \epi\ and \i“n\ (\epi\ and \eimi\) like \tˆi epiousˆi\ ("on the coming day," "the next day," kjv@Acts:16:12|). But the adjective \epiousios\...of an Aramaic original. Moulton and ..._Vocabulary_ say: "The papyri have as yet shed no clear light upon this difficult word (Matthew:6:11; kjv@Luke:11:3|), which was in all probability a new coinage by the author of the Greek Q to render his Aramaic Original" (this in 1919). Deissmann claims that only about fifty purely New Testament or "Christian" words can be admitted out of the more than 5,000 used. "But when a word is not recognizable at sight as a Jewish or Christian new formation, we must consider it as an ordinary Greek word until the contrary is proved. \Epiousios\ has all the appearance of a word that originated in trade and traffic of the everyday life of the people (cf. my hints in _Neutestamentliche Studien Georg Heinrici dargebracht_, Leipzig, 1914, pp. 118f.). The opinion here expressed has been confirmed by A. Debrunner's discovery (_Theol. Lit. Ztg_. 1925, Col. 119) of \epiousios\ in an ancient housekeeping book" (_Light from the Ancient East_, New ed. 1927, p. 78 and note 1). Songs:then it is not a word coined by the Evangelist or by Q to express an Aramaic original. The word occurs also in three late MSS. after 2Macc. 1:8, \tous epiousious\ after \tous artous\. The meaning, in view of the kindred participle (\epiousˆi\) in kjv@Acts:16:12|, seems to be "for the coming day," a daily prayer for the needs of the next day as every housekeeper understands like the housekeeping book discovered by Debrunner.

rwp@Matthew:8:17 @{Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases} (\autos tas astheneias elaben kai tas nosous ebastasen\). A quotation from kjv@Isaiah:53:4|. It is not clear in what sense Matthew applies the words in Isaiah whether in the precise sense of the Hebrew or in an independent manner. Moffatt translates it: "He took away our sicknesses, and bore the burden of our diseases." Goodspeed puts it: "He took our sickness and carried away our diseases." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 102f.) thinks that Matthew has made a free interpretation of the Hebrew, has discarded the translation of the Septuagint, and has transposed the two Hebrew verbs so that Matthew means: "He took upon himself our pains, and bore our diseases." Plummer holds that "It is impossible, and also unnecessary, to understand what the Evangelist understood by 'took ' (\elaben\) and 'bare' (\ebastasen\). It at least must mean that Christ removed their sufferings from the sufferers. He can hardly have meant that the diseases were transferred to Christ." \Bastaz“\ occurs freely in the papyri with the sense of lift, carry, endure, carry away (the commonest meaning, Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_), pilfer. In kjv@Matthew:3:11| we have the common vernacular use to take off sandals. The Attic Greek did not use it in the sense of carrying off. "This passage is the cornerstone of the faith-cure theory, which claims that the atonement of Christ includes provision for _bodily_ no less than for spiritual healing, and therefore insists on translating 'took away'" (Vincent). We have seen that the word \bastaz“\ will possibly allow that meaning, but I agree with McNeile: "The passage, _as Mt. employs it_, has no bearing on the doctrine of the atonement." But Jesus does show his sympathy with us. "Christ's sympathy with the sufferers was so intense that he really felt their weaknesses and pains." In our burdens Jesus steps under the load with us and helps us to carry on.

rwp@Matthew:20:28 @{A ransom for many} (\lutron anti poll“n\). The Son of man is the outstanding illustration of this principle of self-abnegation in direct contrast to the self-...slaves. See examples in Moulton and ..._Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 328f. There is the notion of exchange also in the use of \anti\. Jesus gave his own life as the price of freedom for the slaves of sin. There are those who refuse to admit that Jesus held this notion of a substitutionary death because the word in the N.T. occurs only here and the corresponding passage in kjv@Mark:10:45|. But that is an easy way to get rid of passages that contradict one's theological opinions. Jesus here rises to the full consciousness of the significance of his death for men.

rwp@Matthew:21:3 @{The Lord} (\ho kurios\). It is not clear how the word would be understood here by those who heard the message though it is plain that Jesus applies it to himself. The word is from \kuros\, power or authority. In the LXX it is common in a variety of uses which appear in the N.T. as master of the slave (Matthew:10:24|), of the harvest (9:38|), of the vineyard (20:8|), of the emperor (Acts:13:27|), of God (Matthew:11:20; 11:25|), and often of Jesus as the Messiah (Acts:10:36|). Note kjv@Matthew:8:25|. This is the only time in Matthew where the words \ho kurios\ are applied to Jesus except the doubtful passage in 28:6|...usage is shown by Moulton and ..._Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_. Particularly in Egypt it was applied to "the Lord Serapis" and Ptolemy and Cleopatra are called "the lords, the most great gods" (\hoi kurioi theoi megistoi\). Even Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa I are addressed as "Lord King." In the west the Roman emperors are not so termed till the time of Domitian. But the Christians boldly claimed the word for Christ as Jesus is here represented as using it with reference to himself. It seems as if already the disciples were calling Jesus "Lord" and that he accepted the appellative and used it as here.

rwp@Philippians:2:26 @{He longed after} (\epipoth“n ˆn\). Periphrastic imperfect of \epipothe“\ (Phillipians:1:8|), "he was yearning after." {You all} (\pantas humas\). Songs:again (1:5,7,8|). {Was sore troubled} (\adˆmon“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again (repeat \ˆn\) of the old word \adˆmone“\ either from an unused \adˆm“n\ (\a\ privative and \dˆmos\, away from home, homesick) or from \adˆm“n, adˆsai\ (discontent, bewilderment). The _Vocabulary_ of Moulton and Milligan gives one papyrus example in line with the latter etymology. See already kjv@Matthew:26:37; kjv@Mark:14:33|. In any case the distress of Epaphroditus was greatly increased when he knew that the Philippians (the home-folks) had learned of his illness, "because ye had heard that he was sick" (\dioti ˆkousate hoti ˆsthenˆse\), "because ye heard that he fell sick" (ingressive aorist). {He was sick} (\ˆsthenˆse\). Ingressive aorist, "he did become sick." {Nigh unto death} (\paraplˆsion thanat“i\). Only example in N.T. of this compound adverbial preposition (from the adjective \paraplˆsios\) with the dative case.

rwp@Revelation:7:14 @{I say} (\eirˆka\). Perfect active indicative of \eipon\, "I have said." "To the Seer's mind the whole scene was still fresh and vivid" (Swete) like \kekragen\ in kjv@John:1:15| and \eilˆphen\ in kjv@Revelation:5:7|, not the so-..."aoristic perfect" which even Moulton... (_Prol_. p. 145) is disposed to admit. {My lord} (\Kurie mou\). "An address of reverence to a heavenly being" (Vincent), not an act of worship on John's part. {Thou knowest} (\su oidas\). "At once a confession of ignorance, and an appeal for information" (Swete), not of full confidence like \su oidas\ in kjv@John:21:15ff|. {They which come out of the great tribulation} (\hoi erchomenoi ek tˆs thlipse“s tˆs megalˆs\). Present middle participle with the idea of continued repetition. "The martyrs are still arriving from the scene of the great tribulation" (Charles). Apparently some great crisis is contemplated (Matthew:13:19ff.; 24:21; kjv@Mark:13:10|), though the whole series may be in mind and so may anticipate final judgment. {And they washed} (\kai eplunan\). First aorist active indicative of \plun“\, old verb, to wash, in N.T. only kjv@Luke:5:2; kjv@Revelation:7:14; 22:14|. This change of construction after \hoi erchomenoi\ from \hoi plunˆsantes\ to \kai eplunan\ is common in the Apocalypse, one of Charles's Hebraisms, like \kai epoiˆsen\ in 1:6| and \kai planƒi\ in 2:20|. {Made them white} (\eleukanan\). First aorist active indicative of \leukain“\, to whiten, old verb from \leukos\ (verse 13|), in N.T. only here and kjv@Mark:9:3|. "Milligan remarks that _robes_ are the expression of character and compares the word _habit_ used of dress" (Vincent). The language here comes partly from kjv@Genesis:49:11| and partly from kjv@Exodus:19:10,14|. For the cleansing power of Christ's blood see also kjv@Romans:3:25; 5:9; kjv@Colossians:1:20: kjv@Ephesians:1:7; kjv@1Peter:1:2; kjv@Hebrews:9:14; kjv@1John:1:7; kjv@Revelation:1:5; 5:9; 22:14|. "The aorists look back to the life on earth when the cleansing was effected" (Swete). See kjv@Phillipians:2:12f.| for both divine and human aspects of salvation. {In the blood of the Lamb} (\en t“i haimati tou arniou\). There is power alone in the blood of Christ to cleanse from sin (1John:1:7|), not in the blood of the martyrs themselves. The result is "white," not "red," as one might imagine.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL Here scholars divide again. Many who deny the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles accept the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, Baur, for instance. Hort, Lightfoot, and Westcott argued for the Johannine authorship on the ground that the Apocalypse was written early (time of Nero or Vespasian) when John did not know Greek so well as when the Epistles and the Gospel were written. There are numerous grammatical laxities in the Apocalypse, termed by Charles a veritable grammar of its own. They are chiefly retention of the nominative case in appositional words or phrases, particularly participles, many of them sheer Hebraisms, many of them clearly intentional (as in kjv@Revelation:1:4|), all of them on purpose according to Milligan (_Revelation_ in Schaff's Pop. Comm.) and Heinrici (_Der Litterarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften_, p. 85). Radermacher (_Neutestamentliche Grammatik_, p. 3)...illiterate papyri. J. H. Moulton... (_Grammar_, Vol. II, Part I, p. 3) says: "Its grammar is perpetually stumbling, its idiom is that of a foreign language, its whole style that of a writer who neither knows nor cares for literary form." But we shall see that the best evidence is for a date in Domitian's reign and not much later than the Fourth Gospel. It is worth noting that in kjv@Acts:4:13| Peter and John are both termed by the Sanhedrin \agrammatoi kai idi“tai\ (unlettered and unofficial men). We have seen the possibility that II Peter represents Peter's real style or at least that of a different amanuensis from Silvanus in kjv@1Peter:5:12|. It seems clear that the Fourth Gospel underwent careful scrutiny and possibly by the elders in Ephesus (John:21:24|). If John wrote the Apocalypse while in Patmos and so away from Ephesus, it seems quite possible that here we have John's own uncorrected style more than in the Gospel and Epistles. There is also the added consideration that the excitement of the visions played a part along with a certain element of intentional variations from normal grammatical sequence. An old man's excitement would bring back his early style. There are numerous coincidences in vocabulary and style between the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse.

Close Tab